Disposed

Om Prakash Pathak and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2025/9791/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that quashing proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are maintainable even if a statutory remedy under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act exists, provided the entire proceeding is under challenge. The Court disposed of the application by directing expeditious disposal of the discharge application and staying coercive steps temporarily.

What did the court decide?

Permitted to move discharge applications within three weeks; stayed coercive steps until disposal of discharge application or six weeks, whichever is earlier.

Om Prakash Pathak and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9791 of 2025

¶3

Om Prakash Pathak And 4 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 14

¶10

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶12

2. This application has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶13

"To quash the proceedings of Session Trial No. 421/2019, state of U.P Versus Om Prakash Pathak & Other, pending in court of Special Judge, S.C & S.T. Act, Pratapgarh, arises from the Crime No. 03/2019, U/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 286 I.P.C & U/s 3 (2)(va) of S.C & S.T. Act, Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh & impugned cognizance order dated 27.09.2019 passed by Special Judge, S.C & S.T. Act, Pratapgarh in Crime No. 03/2019, U/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 286 I.P.C & U/s 3 (2)(va) of S.C & S.T. Act, Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh and impugned chargesheet of Crime No. 03/2019, U/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 286 I.P.C & U/s 3 (2)(va) of S.C & S.T. Act, Police Station Baghrai, District Pratapgarh."

¶14

It is evident from the office report that a defect has been mentioned that as per the prayer made in the petition, proper remedy of statutory appeal u/s 14-A(1) of SC/ST Act is available.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicants, in response to the aforesaid defect, submits that such controversy has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Abhishek Awasthi alias Bholu Awasthi Vs. State of U.P. and another (Neutral Citation No.-

¶16

A482 No. 9791 of 2025

¶17

¶18

2024:AHC:185370-DB) observing therein that in case the charge-sheet is also under trial, the petition is maintainable u/s 528 B.N.S.S. (erstwhile 482 Cr.P.C.).

¶19

Considering the objection of the Registry as well as the judgment relied by the applicants' counsel, it is evident that the Division Bench of this Court has held in the aforesaid judgment that the petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is maintainable in case the entire proceeding is under challenge. Therefore, the objection of the Registry is hereby ruled out.

¶20

After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicants submit that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicants may be permitted to move discharge application through counsel and suitable directions may be issued for expeditious disposal of the same.

¶21

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

¶22

In view of above, it is provided that applicants are permitted to move their discharge application(s) through counsel within three weeks from today and in case any such application(s) are being filed, same shall be heard and decided expeditiously after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order.

¶23

Till the aforesaid period of six weeks or during pendency of discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶24

In case of failure on the part of applicants in moving the discharge application(s) within the aforesaid period, they will not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

¶25

With above directions, this application stands disposed of .

¶26

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶27

December 9, 2025

¶28

Arpan

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Om Prakash Pathak and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Pathak and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arun Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Dharmendra Kumar ( in Fir Dharmendra Kumar Pandey ) and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Suman Dwivedi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Sneh Lata vs U.P. State Warehousing Corporation Lko. Thru. Managing Director and Another

Mohd Irfan @ Wahajuddin and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Bablu Saini Thru. Wife Shabrun Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.